3. Conclusion
It is well-established that men’s violence against women and girls increases in intensity and prevalence during humanitarian emergencies. However, in spite of claims made by policy-makers and multilateral development actors, existing energy literature suggests only a tenuous link between the prevention of violence against women and girls and the provision of energy in emergencies.
Energy, whether it be firewood, fuels or cookstoves, is not a solution to the prevalence of violence against women and girls during emergencies. Indeed, emerging feminist literature demonstrates such violence is driven by underlying gendered inequalities, masculinities and men’s own experiences of trauma, violence and poverty. Gender-based violence in refugee and displaced person camps is therefore complex and contextual, and irreducible to a single problem with a single solution.
Moreover, given the nature of the causes of violence against women and girls, grassroots and women’s organisations or feminist movements are better placed for the political and localised work of violence prevention than humanitarian or multilateral organisations. For such groups energy resources and technologies could be used as a vehicle to implement strategies to prevent violence. Such initiatives include involving men as security teams in fuel collection, or income generation projects based on alternative fuels or improved cookstoves. However, engaging with gender through energy-related practices may neither be relevant nor a priority for community-based organisations or feminist movements, and is at most one approach to prevent violence, which may only be relevant in particular contexts. Energy is therefore not a solution to preventing violence against women and girls in refugee or displaced person camp settings.